Best Chopper and tank
Foxhound
07 Jun 2006
Helicopter: MI-35 Gunship.
Tank: Abrams. though the Challanger 2, Leopard, and T-80 (I think) come close, that Abrams is one tough SOB.
Tank: Abrams. though the Challanger 2, Leopard, and T-80 (I think) come close, that Abrams is one tough SOB.
Kris
07 Jun 2006
Tanks: Every goddamn German tanks in WWII, They were ahead of there time back then 
Heli: NONE (muahahaha)

Heli: NONE (muahahaha)
Sgt. Nuker
07 Jun 2006
Tank: Merkava Mk. III/IV This tank deserves a little more recognition, and the IDF have given it some pretty slick innovations, not to mention it looks pretty sweet.
Helicopter: Mi-24 Hind. Not because everyone else is saying it's the best, but because it can do multiple things, and do those things well. It's a true gunship, and it's awesome to look at.
Regards,
Major Nuker
Helicopter: Mi-24 Hind. Not because everyone else is saying it's the best, but because it can do multiple things, and do those things well. It's a true gunship, and it's awesome to look at.
Regards,
Major Nuker
DerKrieger
09 Jun 2006
Tank:
WWII:
T-34/85
PzKpW VI Panther
Modern:
M1A2 Abrams (fast and powerful)
Leopard 2A6
T-80UM-2 Black Eagle
Merkava
Attack Helicopter:
AH-64D Apache Longbow
Mi-24D Hind
Ka-52 Werewolf
Edited by Gen. Patton, 09 June 2006 - 19:06.
WWII:
T-34/85
PzKpW VI Panther
Modern:
M1A2 Abrams (fast and powerful)
Leopard 2A6
T-80UM-2 Black Eagle
Merkava
Attack Helicopter:
AH-64D Apache Longbow
Mi-24D Hind
Ka-52 Werewolf
Edited by Gen. Patton, 09 June 2006 - 19:06.
AllStarZ
14 Jun 2006
Yayo01, on 7 Jun 2006, 13:59, said:
Tanks: Every goddamn German tanks in WWII, They were ahead of there time back then 
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Not really. In fact German armour was always inferior to those of other major nations in the early years of WWII. Its only till they introduced the Panther and the Tiger as well as super heavy armoured vehicles that they really had superiority in armour.
They won their great early victories because of Blitzkrieg.
Edited by AllStarZ, 14 June 2006 - 21:40.
Crush3r
18 Jun 2006
Tanks:
WWII:
German: Panzer VII King Tiger - The Overlord of WWII
Allies: Churchill Mk III - It's last incarnation proved to be effective
Soviet: T-34 - Mass produced & effective
Overall: Panzer VIII
Modern:
US: M1A2 Abrams - Fast, good weaponry and overheats like no othe in the desert
Russian: T90 - The latest in the T series is it's best
Europe: Leopard 2 - Fast, powerful and easy to drive
Middle East: Merkava II - High survivability rate
Overall: Leopard 2
Greatest Tank Of All Time: Leopard 2
Heli's:
US: AH-64D Apache
Russian: Mi-24D Hind
Greatest Heli Of All Time: Mi-24D
Greatest Weapon Of All Time: The Human Mind
WWII:
German: Panzer VII King Tiger - The Overlord of WWII
Allies: Churchill Mk III - It's last incarnation proved to be effective
Soviet: T-34 - Mass produced & effective
Overall: Panzer VIII
Modern:
US: M1A2 Abrams - Fast, good weaponry and overheats like no othe in the desert
Russian: T90 - The latest in the T series is it's best
Europe: Leopard 2 - Fast, powerful and easy to drive
Middle East: Merkava II - High survivability rate
Overall: Leopard 2
Greatest Tank Of All Time: Leopard 2
Heli's:
US: AH-64D Apache
Russian: Mi-24D Hind
Greatest Heli Of All Time: Mi-24D
Greatest Weapon Of All Time: The Human Mind
Moosy Crisp
18 Jun 2006
Yayo01, on 7 Jun 2006, 11:59, said:
Tanks: Every goddamn German tanks in WWII, They were ahead of there time back then 
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I believe the Ruskies kicked their asses with the T-27 or 72 I can't remember the name but they owned all.
Moosy Crisp
19 Jun 2006
Like I said, it had a T in front of it but I can't remember exactly, so nanner nanner boo boo. Oh, it hit me, It's a T-32!
AllStarZ
19 Jun 2006
The overall best tank of World War II must be the T-34, no question about it. It had a clean balance between speed, firepower, and protection, as well as a reliability record and ruggedness that beat the hell out of any German tank, period.
Balance is important in tanks. Think about it this way:
If you had a tank which emphasized armour and firepower, then it would be a sitting duck for aircraft, expensive and difficult to produce, as well as not there when you need it, as it would keep breaking down, and have limited fuel range and speed due to its weight. (As with the Jagdtiger, King Tiger, and Tiger tanks).
If you had a tank which emphasized speed and firepower, then it would be able to take out a ton of tanks, but would ultimately get its ass kicked because as fast as a tank can be, it isn't faster than a tank shell (The best example is the Hellcat)
If it plain emphasized speed, it would dart around before someone puts a big fat tank shell in its turret to stop it (A13 Cruiser).
If you had a tank which emphasized armour, then its armament would be completely ineffective at longer ranges against most tanks, and would therefore have to go closer to deal damage and therefore nullify the advantages in armor. (as happened with the British Matilda II). Same would go if it emphasized speed as well.
If it simply emphasized armour, then it would be nothing more than a mobile lead weight, barely able to do anything.
And no, you still fail. Its T-34.
Edited by AllStarZ, 19 June 2006 - 01:00.
Balance is important in tanks. Think about it this way:
If you had a tank which emphasized armour and firepower, then it would be a sitting duck for aircraft, expensive and difficult to produce, as well as not there when you need it, as it would keep breaking down, and have limited fuel range and speed due to its weight. (As with the Jagdtiger, King Tiger, and Tiger tanks).
If you had a tank which emphasized speed and firepower, then it would be able to take out a ton of tanks, but would ultimately get its ass kicked because as fast as a tank can be, it isn't faster than a tank shell (The best example is the Hellcat)
If it plain emphasized speed, it would dart around before someone puts a big fat tank shell in its turret to stop it (A13 Cruiser).
If you had a tank which emphasized armour, then its armament would be completely ineffective at longer ranges against most tanks, and would therefore have to go closer to deal damage and therefore nullify the advantages in armor. (as happened with the British Matilda II). Same would go if it emphasized speed as well.
If it simply emphasized armour, then it would be nothing more than a mobile lead weight, barely able to do anything.
Moosy Crisp!, on 18 Jun 2006, 20:03, said:
Like I said, it had a T in front of it but I can't remember exactly, so nanner nanner boo boo. Oh, it hit me, It's a T-32!
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
And no, you still fail. Its T-34.
Edited by AllStarZ, 19 June 2006 - 01:00.
DEATH584
22 Jun 2006
Tank: Leopard 2
Heli: Apache
I don't see why poeple like the mi-24 so much, the afgans wiped the floor with that thing. Plus its so big that it dosnt even seem practical in modern warfare.
Urban combat + stinger = dead mi-24.
Heli: Apache
I don't see why poeple like the mi-24 so much, the afgans wiped the floor with that thing. Plus its so big that it dosnt even seem practical in modern warfare.
Urban combat + stinger = dead mi-24.
AllStarZ
22 Jun 2006
DEATH584, on 22 Jun 2006, 18:35, said:
I don't see why poeple like the mi-24 so much, the afgans wiped the floor with that thing. Plus its so big that it dosnt even seem practical in modern warfare.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It's heavily armed, armored, and can carry troops. Think Apache but less high-tech, bigger, and mixed with a huey.
DEATH584
22 Jun 2006
I under stand that, but if you lose one to some wise ass with a stinger and its like, "OMG I just lost my huge expensive choper to an inexpenive stinger missile."
And as history has shown us, this choper is no match for USA backed gurrilas.
And as history has shown us, this choper is no match for USA backed gurrilas.
AllStarZ
22 Jun 2006
No, the Taliban could've handled them on their own.
Besides, you backed South Vietnamese and French guerilla soldiers, and they failed miserably.
Edited by AllStarZ, 22 June 2006 - 23:07.
Besides, you backed South Vietnamese and French guerilla soldiers, and they failed miserably.
Edited by AllStarZ, 22 June 2006 - 23:07.
DEATH584
23 Jun 2006
Dosn't matter, your still insulting the mi-24. But any way the French were doomed to lose and if the US really wanted to win in veitnam(as in the public) they could have.
AllStarZ
23 Jun 2006
The thing is that they didn't. And the FFI in WWII failed too.
Edited by AllStarZ, 23 June 2006 - 02:32.
Edited by AllStarZ, 23 June 2006 - 02:32.
Alie
23 Jun 2006
i don't realy check up on modern military technology but meh
tank : M1A1 Abrams since I guess it's reliable(please remember that i have limated knowledge about military)
helicopter: Hokum : thoush, i never seen it in action, it looks like it could kick some major arse =)
tank : M1A1 Abrams since I guess it's reliable(please remember that i have limated knowledge about military)
helicopter: Hokum : thoush, i never seen it in action, it looks like it could kick some major arse =)
IDF Godzilla
28 Jun 2006
People forget that the T-90 is just another T-72 upgrade...
Its basicly the same tank, with new turret armour and thats it.
I don't like to arange "best of" by modern/old.
Best tank, by all times: T-34
Best hely: Hind
Its basicly the same tank, with new turret armour and thats it.
I don't like to arange "best of" by modern/old.
Best tank, by all times: T-34
Best hely: Hind
smooder
03 Jul 2006
Airete Tank

Centauro Tank Destroyer

Dardo APC

Eurofighter Typhoon (best thing ever!)

Agusta A129 Mangusta Helibopter

NHI NH90 Transport Helibopter

Harrier Jet- Its cooooool

That pretty much sums it allll up

Centauro Tank Destroyer

Dardo APC

Eurofighter Typhoon (best thing ever!)

Agusta A129 Mangusta Helibopter

NHI NH90 Transport Helibopter

Harrier Jet- Its cooooool

That pretty much sums it allll up